This chapter discusses how to collect data and
perform surveys for TDM program planning and evaluation.

Introduction

Data Collection and Surveys are important for TDM
Planning and Evaluation. This information helps
improve the effectiveness of TDM programs, and identify possible problems and
opportunities for improvement.

The following data is typically collected:

·Before-and-after travel
behavior data, such as commute mode choice and Average Vehicle Ridership.

·Information on takeback
effects, such as additional vehicle trips that participants make when they
telecommute, or when they have extra non-work days due to Compressed Workweeks.

·Participants’
reactions, including both positive and negative feelings about the program and
individual strategies.

·Problems and barriers,
including unanticipated costs, spillover impacts (such as parking problems in
nearby neighborhoods), and opposition by some participants.

·Costs to participants,
such as additional home heating and electricity consumption while
telecommuting, and perceived benefits, such as more convenient childcare
scheduling.

·Costs and benefits to
employers, including program administrative costs, and effects on productivity
and recruitment.

·Market information
(i.e., surveys of potential participants) to help determine Demand
for potential new transportation services and the effects of possible
transportation improvements, and to identify barriers and potential problems.

·Parking and traffic
counts.

This information can be used to produce an
annual “State of the Commute” report, which describes TDM programs and
resources, travel trends, and comparisons with other communities.

It is important that the data which is
collected be comparable between different times and geographic areas. For
example, it is helpful to use the same survey questions and evaluation methods
for different worksites, and when performing surveys at different times, so the
results are comparable. State, provincial or regional transportation planning
agencies can develop standard evaluation procedures to insure data quality and
consistency.

TDM Performance
Indicators

Below are common Performance
Indicators used to Evaluate TDM programs. These
indicators can be defined for a particular time (such as peak-hour) and
geographic location (such as a particular destination, district or region).

·Awareness – the
portion of potential users who are aware of a program or service.

·Participation –
the number of people who respond to an outreach effort or request to
participate in a program.

·Utilization –
the number of people who use a service or alternative mode.

·Mode split –
the portion of travelers who use each transportation mode.

·Mode shift –
the number or portion of automobile trips shifted to other modes.

·Average Vehicle Occupancy (AVO): Number of people traveling in private vehicles divided by the
number of private vehicle trips. This excludes transit vehicle users and
walkers.

·Average Vehicle Ridership (AVR): All person trips divided by the number of private vehicle trips.
This includes transit vehicle users and walkers.

·Vehicle Trips or
Peak Period Vehicle Trips: The total number of private vehicles
arriving at a destination (often called “trip generation” by engineers).

·Vehicle Trip Reduction – the number or percentage of automobiles removed from traffic.

·Vehicle Miles of Travel (VTM) Reduced – the number of trips reduced times average trip length.

·Energy and emission reductions – these are calculated by multiplying VMT reductions times
average vehicle energy consumption and emission rates.

·Cost Per Unit of Reduction – these measures of cost-effectiveness are calculated by dividing
program costs by a unit of change. For example, the cost effectiveness of
various TDM programs could be compared based on cents per trip reduced, or
ton of air pollution emission reductions. However, cost-effectiveness
analysis that only considers direct impacts and a single objective may
overlook additional costs and benefits to participants and society. For
example, two TDM programs may have the same direct costs per unit of emission
reduction, but differ significantly in terms of consumer costs, consumer
travel options, traffic congestion, parking costs, crash risk and land use impacts.

Evaluation
studies can compare Performance Indicator values
before-and-after, over time (for example, over months or years),
with-and-without (for example, comparing performance indicators at a worksite
or area that has a TDM program with otherwise comparable sites that do not
have such programs, or with regional averages).

A variety of
methods can be used to collect the data needed for performance evaluation,
including general travel surveys and Statistics,
participant surveys, parking lot counts, traffic counts, and focus groups.
Before-and-after and with-and-with comparisons require the collection of good
baseline data, or the use of readily-available statistics.

Benefits and Costs

Benefits include improved TDM program
effectiveness, early detection of possible problems, and justification for TDM
program support.

Costs include administrative costs for
gathering and evaluating information, and time/bother to participants for
filling out surveys. Some employees may be uncomfortable answering surveys they
consider personal or coercive.

Best Practices

·Establish data
collection and evaluation plans early during TDM program development.

Examples and Case Studies

The Washington
State Commute Trip Reduction law provides several possible methods for
employers to track their employees’ commute trips, including participant
surveys, transit pass and ridesharing benefits, or parking lot counts. The
state provides a model survey, or employers can produce their own.

Developing Country Travel Demand Surveys

Comprehensive and accurate travel
statistics are critical for transportation planning. Some jurisdictions and
researchers have performed travel demand surveys in developing countries. In
2003 the South African Department of Transportation commissioned that country’s
first National Household Travel Survey which sampled more than 50,000
residents, a larger than normal sample size for such a survey in order to
ensure credible statistical data for all major demographic and geographic
groups concerning both motorized and non-motorized travel (SADoT). During April
and May 2012, researchers completed 2,068 travel survey interviews in three Rio
de Janeiro favelas (informal, low-income communities) which provided
information on vehicular ownership, non-motorized transport, modal share,
vehicle parking, perception of road safety, plus data on the destination, mode,
timing and purpose of 4,336 unique trips (Koch,
Lindau and Nassi 2013).

Web-Based Travel Surveys

Commute Trip Reduction programs in Southern California use Internet-based surveys to collect travel data from program
participants. Surveys for multiple worksites can be set up and monitored from a
single location. This allows data to be collected with minimal effort by both
program managers and participants. Surveys are automatically cross-checked for
completion, and reports are automatically generated. The results are accurate
and consistent, facilitating comparisons between programs. Electronic reporting
minimizes the paperwork burden required to collect accurate data.

The Neighborhood
Smart Trips program provides education, encouragement and support for
walking, cycling and public transit travel in Bellingham, Washington. A
detailed evaluation indicates that the program resulted in significant shifts
from driving to walking, cycling and public transit travel, resulting in a 15%
reduction in per capita vehicle travel (from 11.4 to 9.7 average daily miles)
by program participants.

Internet Based Surveys

Many TDM organizations now use
Internet-based surveys for evaluation, some based on third-party support
services. Examples include:

Los Angeles-based
RideLinks, Inc. offers a customizable Web-based employee commute survey that
requires no installation or training. From a remote location (i.e. your office
in N.Y. or our office in L.A.), you can implement the survey at multiple sites
(e.g. agency, employers, homes) and monitor survey progress at each site in
real-time. The online survey may be supplemented if necessary with paper
surveys as well.

The standard
commute survey can be tailored for specific trip reduction ordinances. The
Average Vehicle Ridership is automatically calculated and converted into mobile
source emissions generated: CO, VOC, NOx. The report is complete the same day
the survey is closed. A demonstration survey is available at their website
(click on “Demo”- marked with the blue-checked racing flags).

Portions of the
section on Employee Trip Reduction program tracking and evaluation from the BC Transit Travel Options Manual are
included below.

What is program tracking and
evaluation?

Program tracking and evaluation allows you to
determine how well your trip reduction efforts are doing in relation to your
planned targets and in relation to other organization’s Travel Option Plan
programs. Keep in mind that not meeting your targets does not always equate
with failure. You may have set your goals unrealistically high, or some facet
of your plan may be inappropriate to employees’ needs.

Why is ongoing evaluation
important to program success?

The process of program assessment or evaluation,
really takes place to some degree throughout the whole process; it is an
integral part of the process. Recall in our learning cycle of “think”, “act”,
“assess” and “reflect”, we learn best when theory is combined with practice.

Evaluation is where you, as a Travel Option
Coordinator, and your organization as a whole, have an opportunity to learn
from your experience as it grows. Viewed in this light, program evaluation,
though often viewed as separate from the main stream of program activity, is in
fact a very important element to long-term program success. Evaluation is the
first step in the feedback loop that sees your program ‘learn’ and adapt even
as it is being designed and implemented.

How often do I “reflect” on
changing patterns?

Measure as often as you require to keep interest up
and to track progress. People are always interested to see evidence of success
or failure. This feedback in important for program profile.

Annual survey

As a minimum, an annual partial Employee
Transportation Survey is an essential part of your program tracking and
evaluation. Seek out enough information to compare each year’s Average Vehicle
Ridership and Employee Percentage Participation with the year previous, as well
as any other participation targets you may have set. Comparing data generated
each year will provide a clear picture of how your Travel Option Plan is
encouraging change in commuting habits.

Employee Interviews

An essential companion to the annual employee survey,
are informal, but semi structured interviews with both participating and
non-participation fellow employees. Semi structured interviews are just
interviews with open questions that you ask of each interviewee. Open questions
are used to encourage interview participants to volunteer information that you
may not have anticipated in your questions. Open questions are questions for
which there is no yes or no answer. For example, “How would you describe your
experience as a vanpool participant?” is an open question. This will elicit
more information than closed questions such as, “Was your experience with the
van pool good or bad?”

Ongoing feedback

Canvass fellow workers about their expectations and
concerns about your company’s Travel Option Plan. Speak with them in the
lunchroom, place a more comprehensive questionnaire in the employee newsletter
and (of course) bring up the topic among your own carpool mates. Keep a record
of what they tell you, to see if any pattern emerges. The best suggestions
usually come from those who have to live the plan, day in and day out.

What benchmarks or other measures
do I use?

Average Vehicle Ridership

Average Vehicle Ridership is recommended as the best
single overall benchmark for your organization. When determined using the
standards of this manual, AVR is easily measured, easily understood, and will
enable you to compare your commuting patterns with that of other organizations
as well.

Employee Percentage Participation Calculation

We also recommend you measure and set targets using
the “Employee Percentage Participation Calculation” described in this manual.
This calculation measures the alternative travel modes used by employees as a
percent of all employees. By using the Employee Percentage Participation
Calculation, you be able to assess, report and set new targets about what
percent of all employees in your workplace travel to work in the different
modes i.e. solo drivers, car and van poolers, transit riders, cyclists,
walker/joggers, and telecommuters.

Made-at-home benchmarks and measures

Depending on the nature of your Travel Option Plan,
the travel options best suited to your organization and the targets your Travel
Option Plan set, you will likely develop your own specific benchmarks to assess
progress. These could include cost benefit analyzes, changing employee
perception and attitudes, or trace links between the program and workplace
productivity and employee absenteeism, for example.

References And Resources For More Information

Auditor General (2003), “Road Transportation in Urban
Areas: Accountability for Reducing Greenhouse Gases,” 2003 Report of the
Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Office of the Auditor General of Canada (www.oag-bvg.gc.ca).

Performance Measurement Exchange (http://knowledge.fhwa.dot.gov/cops/pm.nsf/home),
is a website supported by the U.S. Federal Highway Administration and the
Transportation Research Board to promote better transportation decision-making.

This Encyclopedia is
produced by the Victoria Transport Policy Institute to help improve
understanding of Transportation Demand Management. It is an ongoing project.
Please send us your comments and suggestions for improvement.